Monica Gupta

The applicant was injured in a motor vehicle accident and received statutory accident benefits until the insurer terminated his weekly income benefits.

The applicant applied for arbitration, seeking weekly income benefits for the period from August 1994 to August 1996.

Although the arbitrator found the applicant to be a poor witness whose statements to medical assessors were unreliable, the arbitrator accepted the testimony of a lay witness who observed the applicant's physical limitations during a home renovation project.

The arbitrator concluded that the applicant suffered a substantial inability to perform the essential tasks of his pre-accident factory job due to back and leg pain caused by the accident.

The applicant was awarded weekly income benefits for the disputed period, plus interest.

The applicant sought statutory accident benefits after walking into the open hatch of a parked mobile production studio vehicle.

The insurer denied benefits, arguing the incident was not an 'accident' under the Schedule.

The arbitrator applied the Amos test and found that the vehicle was being used as a mobile production studio, not an automobile, at the time of the incident.

The arbitrator concluded that the injuries did not result from the ordinary and well-known activities to which automobiles are put, and therefore the incident did not constitute an 'accident'.

The application was dismissed, but the applicant was awarded expenses.